About your Search

20121118
20121118
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
performance. governor romney had a strong performance and we knew that. even when he took a flyer against ted kennedy. he dominated the debate performance. we knew it was a strength of governor romney. just showing up on the stage and, you know, he was going to come out of the debate like that. we knew that. he was too low. romney is always go to get 47 and 48 and 49 in states like virginia and florida and virginia. we were not go to win the first debate. he was the only person on that stage that had something to gain out of the first debate. but obviously we had a poor performance and he had a very strong performance. we said it publicly and most did not believe at the time. i think it is now the truth. the race did not fundamentally change. all of the things that happened is the gains governor romney would have made slowly over october, he would have kept gaining ground and the race would have gotten closer. he accelerated those games. they thought that they were go to win. but the structure of the race never really changed. the nine battle ground states that we identified. the nine battle
you a policy question? guest: you have to? >> governor romney recently said president obama route 1 the election because of the guests to young black and hispanic voters. what to do make of these remarks? hosti did not see them but i hed about them. guest: if you look back at the election of 2012, when you have a product you put into the market place, and the marketplace does not buy it, you either have a better marketing or a better product. this is the wake-up call for the republican party to have better marketing republicans need to do better with female voters and blue-collar voters and latino and hispanic voters. we also need to have products that sell that. that does not mean you change your philosophy. i think president obama did a better job getting out the vote in his campaign. i don't think it is a matter of people looking at the election and saying i will vote because of gifts. i think they said which one of these candidates they prefer. host: you disagree with the analysis? guest: of think it is as simple as saying the president gave the gifts. >> your a couple of weeks
similar to what governor romney talked b let's cap expenditures or deductions to increase revenue and focus on spending. >> mike: his plan called for a 50,000 cap you can take reductions whether it was charity, business deduction, but you had up to $50,000 above that you weren't going to get the deduction is that the way it works? >> exactly. if we stay focused on the revenue side it makes it look as if there's appearance of win for with the white house. we don't need a win for the white house. we don't need a win for the congress. we need a win for the american people. i ran for congress because i was concerned about the debt and deficit in this country. there's talk about this fiscal cliff, we might have already been over the cliff now we are trying to determine what type of landing we are going to have when we land. is it going to be soft or hard? it can be softer if we do the right things that cause economic growth that put americans back to work and gets control over spending. >> mike: the president has been saying i want to find ways to compromise. is there anything specific
. republicans have buried their playbook along with governor romney. the big question is what will the new playbook look like? joining me is democratic strategist and susan, a republican strategist. you read that, you go, wow. >> ouch. >> how deep is this? is it toxic load, get rid of him, move on? the rga certainly seems to say that. >> first of all, governor romney, his political career was over on election night. he never showed any interest in being a leader for the republican party. >> it's not so much they have to bury limb. >> start appealing to a wider base of voters. it's not tossing him aside, i don't think he was going to be a player. his remarks earlier this week were very unfortunate. it almost gave a platform for this new branding of republicans. and also saying we're going to be more open. we're not going to allow people who aren't voters to dictate our policies in the media. and what we want to govern most of all, we're more open to seeing that out of the republican party. >> richard, talk to what susan brings up. a couple of days ago in politico, they reported this -- on g
it didn't elect governor romney, but they had a huge influence on the race and the next elections. >> i've heard so many people say since the election, this proves that big money didn't make that much of a difference because it was sort of a wash. >> i think there are a couple of ways that actually made a big difference this year. the first one which is counterintuitive is it may have actually badly injured romney and the reason for that is after citizens united you had these so-called candidate super pacs and in the republican primaries last spring you had romney who was widely the leader and assumed to have it wrapped up and then you had two other candidates who came up and had millions of dollars spent on their behalf by super pacs and kept the race open. they were the gingrich candidacy and his super pac and the santorum one. what it meant was that instead of wrapping thins up in february, romney waited, had all of these primaries where he was attacked and he ended up the primary season somewhat wounded because these republican super pacs had run really vicious ads against them and
for governor romney during the campaign. so he is someone who believes in this cause and we're bringing together a very large group of people that will be part of it. but the idea is to raise money and to be able to exercise our free speech and talk about the fact that we support immigration reform, we can't give money to candidates but we can surely talk about issues that you know that correspond to certain candidates in certain districts and regional gones and this is the way to make change. we can't just keep talking about it and can't assume this problem is going to go away. so i'm very, very pleased to be giving this another shot. because we've tried this before and we have to fix it. it's one of those things that we have to confront and we have to fix. we can't ignore and up until now we've been sort of punting the ball down the road, iing norring it and the situation gets more complex. we're talking about families now. we're not talking about individuals but kids who have been in school who don't know any other country but the u.s. it's time to come to terms with a mistake that a
are appropriate more so than tax increases. getting back to bowles simpson. there was a solution. governor romney offered a solution that wasn't played up in the campaign but to have a flat dollar amount of deductions people could take. >> what about conservatives like bill crystal who are saying it is not going to kill the country if the president raises taxes on millionaires? >> i think it is the wrong thing to do. is it going to kill the country? no, we're the united states. with we survived the last four years of bad government and we will survive another four years of bad government and we will survive if you do it. it will hurt economic growth and government revenues. both parties have an amassive gulf between the people and washington because they see everything in political terms and in terms whofz going 0 vote for them or what interest group will support them opposed to what is right is american and the politicians are telling the people this is bad, that's bad and not what the solutions are. to me, a classic example of thaf is bowles simpson. you had that bipartisan group lay out a very
a lot of people that are discouraged. i have the honor traveling this country on behalf of governor mitt romney 2 i can tell you for those who have not met him, is an extraordinary person. i believe he would have been a phenomenal president. we wish him all the best and hope his voice states involved in the american political process. [applause] we're having this conversation now for those who believe that the limited government conservatism -- who believe in limited government conservatism. this is not about the republican party. this is about limited government conservatism. the republican party is the home of that movement. limited government conservatism has never been decided by presidential elections. for you can find the true meaning of limited government that separatism is in states like this preferred governors like yours are applying tried and true principles to the modern problems of the tunney predict what the first century. if america had a thought from 1% on plummer rate, we would all be very happy, as you should be with the governor and the work to your littleneck governor
appreciate that. >> ainsley: thank you, chris. >> dave: and governor scott walker and bobby jindal and an interesting piece on the future of the republican party. and took some shots, and looked like mitt romney, we'll be interesting. >> clayton: and jindal leading the headlines this week. >> ainsley: and you'll like this next one. >> clayton: come on, if you're a guy, anyone on thanksgiving, football. what about football. sandra lee is here next with the perfect tailgating dishes. she's been working all morning with that stuff over there. >> dave: and considered the world's foremost mentalist, clayton is second on the list, shocking audiences for decade and this morning, the amazing creskin here live to play a trick on us. and you won't want to miss this one. come on in, sir. ♪ 4g lte is the fastest. so, which supeast 4g lte service would yochoose, based on this chart ? don't rush into it, i'm not looking for the fastest answer. obviously verizon. okay, i have a different chart. going that way, does that make a difference ? look at verizon. it's so much more than the other ones.
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)